Viofo A119 M2 HDR poor vs old A119 v1 WDR (low light/day)

H265 doesn't help significantly for dashcam video, AV1 is what we want, it will arrive, eventually...
I would say that much smaller file size with the same image quality is significant.
Most high end cams seem to only support max 512GB cards, with even the previous still sold gen, maxing out at 256GB.
That is not enough space for longer trips at such high bitrates 4K or 1440p60fps with h264 files.
 
I would say that much smaller file size with the same image quality is significant.
Most high end cams seem to only support max 512GB cards, with even the previous still sold gen, maxing out at 256GB.
That is not enough space for longer trips at such high bitrates 4K or 1440p60fps with h264 files.
But for dashcam footage H265 does not give significantly smaller files with the same image quality when compared to H264. File sizes are roughly the same for the same image quality, at least while moving, there are some situations where H265 could help if it wasn't for dashcams using fixed bitrates.
 
It is proven superior and effecient codec.
Incorrect, (not for dash cams).
Even a cheap Chomebook or the cheap kids tablets can play h265 with full hardware acceleration.
Incorrect, (Chromebooks do not play H.265)
I don't fancy 1GB per minute video files at the such high bitrates u can set using h264
Incorrect, (1 minute file A139 Pro @ 60 Mbps = 437 MB).
437 MB .webp


I tested the "secret" H.265 option on the A139 Pro & WM1 and it only saved 11% of storage space, and it increased power consumption, and heat.
The reason for my death campaign for H.265 for dash cam use is compatibility.
Dash Cam footage needs to playable on EVERY device.
Maybe by 2033 ALL computers will play H.265.
 
But for dashcam footage H265 does not give significantly smaller files with the same image quality when compared to H264. File sizes are roughly the same for the same image quality, at least while moving, there are some situations where H265 could help if it wasn't for dashcams using fixed bitrates.
Disagree on that one.
Taking the output files from my A119 M2, 1440p60fps that reports 26K bitrate. Re-encoding the 5 min file to h.265 using nvenc, not as optimized as cpu based encode and more advacned settings that u can set in Handbrake to further efficiency and smaller file size.

Source h.264 file: 948MB
Re-encode h.265 26Kbitrate: 922MB
Re-encode h.265 13Kbitrate: 432MB

Comparing frame side by side. the half bitrate re-encode to full bitrate re-encode, to source even, not seeing any loss in quality.

This is rough compare... but if source encoder of the dash cam is optimized well, its output at 13K h.265 would equal the frame quality h.264 26K.
 
I tested the "secret" H.265 option on the A139 Pro & WM1 and it only saved 11% of storage space, and it increased power consumption, and heat.
The reason for my death campaign for H.265 for dash cam use is compatibility.
Dash Cam footage needs to playable on EVERY device.
Maybe by 2033 ALL computers will play H.265.

My 2016 MBP plays h.265 files fine. My folks ancient HP Bussines desktop, Intel 4th gen cpu, plays h.265 in VLC fine. My kids amazon fire tablet, that cost $30, plays 1080p h.265 bluray rip fine. Not sure the model, but Samsung made Chromebooks i setup for schools, play h.265 files the school serves for remote learning, think are 720p though.
Every computer i have worked on in the last several years, can play h.265 files. Now, 1440p60fps video, maybe not. But that not my point. Even h.264, at that rez, and especially 4K, even modern budget low end hardware can struggle with that. So it really does not matter, if u have cheap low end device, having high rez, high fps, h.264 video over h.264 not make any difference, u not gonna be able to play it smooth.
 
I tested the "secret" H.265 option on the A139 Pro & WM1 and it only saved 11% of storage space, and it increased power consumption, and heat.
Ok. It still saved on storage space, and that adds up.

Heat/power consumption increase, is not surprising, since they not using an optimized chipset for h.265.
Add/design better cooling, a heatsink (which i see in teardown images of a new model), maybe even a small cooling fan or one of those fanless air mover things i seen on LTT.
Power consumption, only an issue when cam is not being powered by the cars alternator, ie, on battery for Parking mode, which, in that case, it can switch to lower power encode mode.

Though, i can understand, now, them holding off on h.265, in favor of AV1. H.265 been very slow to adopt, and it been out for 10yrs....so, AV1. Well, maybe in 2035 we will see it.
 
Samsung made Chromebooks
The computers that need to play raw dash cam files are the pieces of junk found at police departments, court houses, and insurance agencies, etc.
If their lowest ranking, lowest paid staff support can’t figure out how to play an H.265 file it’s most likely not going to be accepted as evidence.

My HP Chromebook does not play H.265 files.
I’ve tried all the extensions in the Chrome Web Store, and none of them work.
All I get is the audio.
Here’s a screen shot of me trying to play clip from the Vantrue S1 Pro.

Screenshot 2023-10-03 12.59.59 PM.webp

So yeah, “Death to H.265 for dash cams”.
Long live H.264, (until 2033).

Ok. It still saved on storage space, and that adds up.
11% is not worth the compatibility issues.
Maybe if it was 90% I would be on board the H.265 train.
 

Attachments

  • HP .webp
    HP .webp
    55 KB · Views: 156
The computers that need to play raw dash cam files are the pieces of junk found at police departments, court houses, and insurance agencies, etc.
If their lowest ranking, lowest paid staff support can’t figure out how to play an H.265 file it’s most likely not going to be accepted as evidence.

My HP Chromebook does not play H.265 files.
I’ve tried all the extensions in the Chrome Web Store, and none of them work.
All I get is the audio.
Here’s a screen shot of me trying to play clip from the Vantrue S1 Pro.

View attachment 68095
So yeah, “Death to H.265 for dash cams”.
Long live H.264, (until 2033).


11% is not worth the compatibility issues.
Maybe if it was 90% I would be on board the H.265 train.
What player is that? Have u tried VLC?
 
Ok. It still saved on storage space, and that adds up.
It saved on storage space at the expense of losing image quality. If driving slowly then it probably wasn't noticeable, but if driving fast under trees then it will be visible.

Source h.264 file: 948MB
Re-encode h.265 26Kbitrate: 922MB
Re-encode h.265 13Kbitrate: 432MB
Presumably those are Mbits per second rather than Kbits.
Comparing frame side by side. the half bitrate re-encode to full bitrate re-encode, to source even, not seeing any loss in quality.
Depends on what is in the image, a computer can easily compress a static scene by 90% and not show any loss in quality. Our dashcams are all recoding at fixed bitrate, so always use the bitrate needed for maximum complexity.

I uploaded this video to Youtube at 4Mb/s, 6.6% the size of the original dashcam file, and I can still read all the plates:
11% is not worth the compatibility issues.
Maybe if it was 90% I would be on board the H.265 train.
So this is 93%, but is not H265, it is AV1:


Big problem is that this, and your example, are compressed by a computer which can take as much time as it likes, not a little low power dashcam that must do the encoding in real time.
 
The computers that need to play raw dash cam files are the pieces of junk found at police departments, court houses, and insurance agencies, etc.
If their lowest ranking, lowest paid staff support can’t figure out how to play an H.265 file it’s most likely not going to be accepted as evidence.
This. The latest and greatest technology is useless if it can't be accessed by the oldest and weakest that need to.
 
This. The latest and greatest technology is useless if it can't be accessed by the oldest and weakest that need to.
True but (at least here in Australia) government departments upgrade their hardware every few years, so they would be on board with the semi-latest standards - not sure how it is there in America.

I'm on board with what @speedingcheetah has said - HEVC has never given me grief, and it's a go-to for me for movies for comparable video quality and like half the actual file size. Whether dash cams are doing an efficient encode or not is a completely different story of course..
 
True but (at least here in Australia) government departments upgrade their hardware every few years, so they would be on board with the semi-latest standards - not sure how it is there in America....
It has nothing to do with America, Australia, Canada, Panama, Bolivia, Portugal or any other country. There are numerous government organizations and private entities worldwide that are constrained by budget and make do with what they have as long as they can (and I applaud them since it's my taxes or premiums they're spending) and cannot go out and get the 'latest and greatest' whenever the urge strikes, or just because it is the 'latest and greatest'.

I'm using dash cams to capture evidence that will help my case in a legal or insurance matter and I want require the data to be captured in a format that can easily be accessed by the largest group of people that might have need to access it - anything else is doing a disservice to me and potentially placing my future (legal and financial) in jeopardy. To do it because the new technology can save me 10% (or 20%, 30%, ...) on the amount of storage I'll use is foolish at best. Larger memory cards are cheap comparatively.

For that reason, and that reason alone, I will never have as my primary dash cam any camera that doesn't have H.264 either as the default or an option, at least until such time as H.265 or AV1 (or the next 'latest and greatest') becomes an industry standard supported by every device in use as much as is possible.
 
Last edited:
It has nothing to do with America, Australia, Canada, Panama, Bolivia, Portugal or any other country. There are numerous government organizations and private entities worldwide that are constrained by budget and make do with what they have as long as they can (and I applaud them since it's my taxes or premiums they're spending) and cannot go out and get the 'latest and greatest' whenever the urge strikes, or just because it is the 'latest and greatest'.

I'm using dash cams to capture evidence that will help my case in a legal or insurance matter and I want require the data to be captured in a format that can easily be accessed by the largest group of people that might have need to access it - anything else is doing a disservice to me and potentially placing my future (legal and financial) in jeopardy. To do it because the new technology can save me 10% (or 20%, 30%, ...) on the amount of storage I'll use is foolish at best. Larger memory cards are cheap comparatively.

For that reason, and that reason alone, I will never have as my primary dash cam any camera that doesn't have H.264 either as the default or an option, at least until such time as H.265 or AV1 (or the next 'latest and greatest') becomes an industry standard supported by every device in use as much as is possible.
Dude, NOTHING can be farther from reality about "Compatibility" when it comes to the legal sector.

My Grandfather been a Expert Witness in the Private Security sector for more than 30yrs, and has delt with hundreds of cases that involve CCTV footage, and dash cam footage from various sources.
Bar fights, shootings, parking lot brawls, break-ins, strong arms robberys etc.
I have assisted him over the years, since i am a techy and he is not, and have dealt with said footage. (saved some of it too, just in case he accidently deleted it, shhh, don't tell the lawyer's)
99% of the time, the footage is some proprietary format, locked to having to use some specific playback software that is super clumsy and unintuitive to use.
Some Police/First Responder Dash cam/body cam systems, have encrypted video even.

3yrs ago, delt with legal things, when my grandfather was hit by a reversing car in a parking lot, while walking out of a gas station store, the Police getting cctv footage. How incompetent they were, and how the say the burned disc they got from the store, "was blank", ... in my experience, it matters not what format the files are made in. Its the incompetent workers, and officers that do not know how to do anything tech wise, that is the main failure point in legal matters. Instead, all we got, was the officer watched the video on the monitor at the store, and his notes on what the saw. The store refused to give us the footage, and the police and lawyers dragged their asses past the 90 day store retention policy, it was never recovered.

Also, having worked in a retail store, and used their CCTV dvr to acces footage when needed, how incredibly overcomplex and clumsy a GUI they have. So it is no wonder to me how average person can not figure out how to export footage in to any sort of "standardized" media format.

Having served on several Jury's, it is always some issue playing footage, and, still see VHS/hi8 tapes being used. Had one trial, just last year, where the Defendants iphone, was handed around to each member of the jury, and instructed to tap the play button, on the footage page in the Ring Doorbell app. No one ever could figure out how to export it, download it, cast it. etc. THIS is the state of American Court system yo...
 
Long live H.264.
All that oppose I put a spell on you. lol
 
Had one trial, just last year, where the Defendants iphone, was handed around to each member of the jury, and instructed to tap the play button, on the footage page in the Ring Doorbell app. No one ever could figure out how to export it, download it, cast it. etc. THIS is the state of American Court system yo...
This reminded me of when a CEO of a a high tech company was going to do a presentation on his own inhouse equipment and he didn't have a clue neither did the front row of very high tech dudes partly because they didn't like him and partly because he never asked for help before the presentation. (Probably because he was about to sack some. Bottom $$ line stuff nothing to do with skills. )
My point being failure can happen anywhere and it is usually knowledge that is lacking and co-operation. (Ego's)
 
Dude, NOTHING can be farther from reality about "Compatibility" when it comes to the legal sector.

My Grandfather been a Expert Witness in the Private Security sector for more than 30yrs, and has delt with hundreds of cases that involve CCTV footage, and dash cam footage from various sources.
Bar fights, shootings, parking lot brawls, break-ins, strong arms robberys etc.
I have assisted him over the years, since i am a techy and he is not, and have dealt with said footage. (saved some of it too, just in case he accidently deleted it, shhh, don't tell the lawyer's)
99% of the time, the footage is some proprietary format, locked to having to use some specific playback software that is super clumsy and unintuitive to use.
Some Police/First Responder Dash cam/body cam systems, have encrypted video even.

3yrs ago, delt with legal things, when my grandfather was hit by a reversing car in a parking lot, while walking out of a gas station store, the Police getting cctv footage. How incompetent they were, and how the say the burned disc they got from the store, "was blank", ... in my experience, it matters not what format the files are made in. Its the incompetent workers, and officers that do not know how to do anything tech wise, that is the main failure point in legal matters. Instead, all we got, was the officer watched the video on the monitor at the store, and his notes on what the saw. The store refused to give us the footage, and the police and lawyers dragged their asses past the 90 day store retention policy, it was never recovered.

Also, having worked in a retail store, and used their CCTV dvr to acces footage when needed, how incredibly overcomplex and clumsy a GUI they have. So it is no wonder to me how average person can not figure out how to export footage in to any sort of "standardized" media format.

Having served on several Jury's, it is always some issue playing footage, and, still see VHS/hi8 tapes being used. Had one trial, just last year, where the Defendants iphone, was handed around to each member of the jury, and instructed to tap the play button, on the footage page in the Ring Doorbell app. No one ever could figure out how to export it, download it, cast it. etc. THIS is the state of American Court system yo...
You just made the case for why "I want require the data to be captured in a format that can easily be accessed by the largest group of people that might have need to access it".
 
You just made the case for why "I want require the data to be captured in a format that can easily be accessed by the largest group of people that might have need to access it".
You will then need to record it to VHS tape, cause, they very easy got it down to wheel out those huge carts, with a crt tv and a vcr under it in court.

Big problem is that this, and your example, are compressed by a computer which can take as much time as it likes, not a little low power dashcam that must do the encoding in real time.
No. As i stated, it was a rough example, and showcase for file size result and quality compare only. (and a re-encode generally will loose a tad bit of quality.

Real time encoding does not need to use max cpu power as it only need to process 30/60 fps real time, not have the power to process already existing future frames, at 300+fps that a desktop PC, i9, for example can do as fast as it can beyond real time.
If i restrict it to only process max 60fps speed, the framerate of the source file, and 1 cpu thread, cpu usage is near idle at 2%. Even a Rpi4b can process high rez video at that rate. (using hardware acceleration)
 
You will then need to record it to VHS tape, cause, they very easy got it down to wheel out those huge carts, with a crt tv and a vcr under it in court.
Show me a dash cam with VHS capabilities and I'll consider it. 🤣
 
You just made the case for why "I want require the data to be captured in a format that can easily be accessed by the largest group of people that might have need to access it".
That is relative though. Those who watch videos on youtube, is a much larger group of people then a group of gray haired, PhD clad stuck up lawyers.

You can make any device capable of accessing youtube, play any media content, via streaming it. It matters not the format, YT will take it all, and make it into streamable format.
You can also do the same thing, locally, with a home media server, such as Plex and stream it to a low end potato, or a million dollar imax screen.
You can also upload the file, direct from you phone, to a file share site, Google Photos, iCloud, OneDrive, etc, that have built in video playback, on any web browser.

Anything you can install the VIOFO app on, you can also stream the cams footage to, direct from the cam, even my 2016 OG Google Pixel, connects and plays back the 1440p60fps footage fine.

So, i fail to see peoples logic and adamant defense of one specific codec, claiming compatibility for playback option availability for others, especially when the topic is about superior quality and efficiency.

Though, i still see, on the webs, pirate movie rips, of current released films, done in ancient Divx, AVI, WMV, XVID codecs. MPEG1 also still refuses to die.
 
Back
Top